End-Phase Project Evaluation at Christian Blind Mission (CBM)

The deliverables of the evaluation are:

• Overall Performance Assessment: The evaluation will specifically measure the overall effectiveness and efficiency (including value for money) of the project in achieving the targeted outputs and outcomes with the agreed budget according to the milestones and indicators in the original project proposal. It will also assess whether activities were relevant to bring about the project outcomes planned in the logical framework. Both data-based indicators (e.g., number of persons supported, income increases, etc.) and narrative/qualitative indicators (e.g., community feedback on livelihood improvement, perception and satisfaction) will be assessed to understand overall effectiveness. This will include collecting data on the number of people affected by the project, disaggregated by gender, age, and disability.
• Livelihood Intervention Impact Assessment: The impact of the project on in-kind livelihood support and income improvement for target populations will be assessed. The number of persons who received in-kind support (e.g., cash transfers, livestock, farm inputs and other materials) will be measured alongside which of these also reported an increase in income (against an initial baseline) from their chosen livelihood activity. Determine the progress of the impact on households and how these interventions are contributing to poverty reduction, economic stability and resilience.
• Improved Mobility and Support Services for Persons with Disabilities: Assessment of how the project has improved physical mobility for persons with disabilities enabling them to participate in economic activities and if they have accessed to at least one new support service. Further, review the appropriateness and relevance of assistive devices (as measured through satisfaction levels) and whether barriers for persons with disabilities were addressed (e.g., transport, infrastructure, community integration) while assessing the effectiveness of the support services offered through referral mechanisms.
• Coordination of the Response: Assessment of the effectiveness of the coordination mechanisms between CBMG, TUPADO, county governments, and other actors. This includes how the coordination could have been better structured to improve engagement, any strengths and/or gaps in collaborative efforts and documenting specific examples of good practice, resulting in recommendations for improving future coordination.
• Accountability to the Participants and Community: Assessment of the inclusive and participatory accountability systems put in place to ensure participants, and the community have a voice in decision-making at all stages. Evaluate how communication and participation mechanisms (such as community feedback loops, consultations, and grievance redress systems) were structured and implemented. Examine how the project responded to this feedback and what changes were made as a result.
• Challenges in implementation: The evaluation will analyse the causes and challenges contributing to any targets not being achieved. This includes identifying internal and external factors such as unforeseen challenges, capacity issues, environmental or cultural factors, or gaps in planning or implementation.
• Risk management: The evaluation will assess how risks to the population and/or the project were identified, managed, and mitigated, including any protection and safeguarding, operational, security, financial, personnel management or other relevant risks.
• Inclusiveness and Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities and underrepresented Persons: Assessment of the inclusiveness and accessibility for persons with disabilities and other underrepresented persons e.g. older persons. Work closely with self-representatives to evaluate how well the project removed barriers to enable participation for these groups, ensuring their full inclusion in livelihood activities and resilience-building efforts. Analyse whether the pre-conditions for inclusion (in terms of disability, gender, and the associated intersectionality) were applied consistently throughout the project.
• OPDs Operational at Turkana County Level: Evaluate the extent this project has improved OPD (Organizations of Persons with Disabilities) effectiveness at county level and their engagement with policy-making bodies and processes. This includes their involvement in the Age and Disability coordination mechanisms and Focal Points structure, advocacy, and inclusion efforts at the county level.

Key qualifications required to perform this consultancy include:

• Demonstrated track record of carrying out similar type of evaluation.
• Ability to present and utilize mixed methodologies for carrying out an evaluation that promotes meaningful participation of the community and project participants.
• Proven ability to work with a team with diverse expertise
• Experience in working with multi-stakeholders/partnerships.
• Familiarity with the GEDSI approaches and the DAC criteria.
• Experience in designing and utilizing participatory and inclusive evaluation methodologies.
• Work experience in the project county or in similar contexts will have an added advantage.
• Experience in livelihoods, economic empowerment and market systems development is required.
• Good intercultural skills and experience.
• Fluent in English and Kiswahili.
• Ideally, experience with livelihood graduation approach methodology.

Candidates with disability are strongly encouraged to apply.